click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
. igor, back to more serious stuff we ought to be talking about. so john boehner is saying hey we can have -- we can find some common ground here and republicans are quick to say yeah, let's follow the boehner thing. when you look at what boehner is saying about how to avoid the fiscal cliff he's not saying we're going to agree with president obama on anything yet right? >> not yet. at least publicly, he's just reheating the old romney proposal which is if you close deductions, that's where you get your revenue. not from letting the high end tax cuts expire. the high-end tax cuts expire. what obama had been campaigning on and what voters want overwhelmingly. so you know, the administration has actually been fairly optimistic about where boehner is and negotiating with boehner and negotiating maybe with some of the rank and file who are more likely to come to an agreement. maybe go into the senate. and doing this very publicly. they're meeting with a lot of groups with labor groups, with business groups and they've
boehner. cut it loose so they can go christmas shopping, senator mcconnell. it's what the people voted for. that's why they voted for me. that's the president talking. we are joined now by nbc's chief white house correspondent chuck todd. thanks for joining us tonight. this was a hot pressure cooker press conference and you were in the middle. let's talk about the president's tactic. it looks like he's got one. here he is sticking out his message of defending the middle class today, sticking to it. he practically dared the republicans to hold tax cuts for the middle class hostage. he went back to that word hostage. let's take a look. >> the other option is to pass a law right now that would prevent any tax hike whatsoever on the first $250,000 of everybody's income. i hope republicans in the house come on board, too. we should not hold the middle class hostage while we debate tax cuts for the wealthy. the most important step we can take right now, i think the foundation for a deal that helps the economy, creates jobs, gives consumersty, which means gives consumers confidence they'll have c
leadership, go to senate, deal over there and then come to boehner and box him in with a deal and present to it him. >> he also said that boehner may want that, too. boehner still doesn't control his caucus. we don't have to ask what the american people wanted. president obama ran on an explicit program of raising taxes on top earners. and boehner is still talking about the romney plan, mess around with loopholes and take away loopholes from top earners. that was romney's plan and romney lost. the president holds the cards here. the world won't come to an end on january 1st if all the rates expire. it's more of a curve. i think we can afford to go off it. >> we'll see. as we quickly approach it. my thanks to the power panel today. i really appreciate your time today. >>> coming up next, a bipartisan plan to fix the nation's debt. the co-chairs are going to join me, ed rendell and former new hampshire senator judd gregg will join me to talk about this. we want to know what you think. should general petraeus have resigned? tweet me your thoughts about this or find me on facebook. oun] today
point -- that speaker boehner showed yesterday in his remarks. he basically said that the president won the election, and he should lead. he basically, he said that he was open to revenues. which is, which many in his own party disagree with. um, so i thought the tone was the right thing. now, you know, you can't expect the speaker to turn on a dime in 24 hours and embrace everything; higher taxes, higher taxes on the wealthy. but i think that privately he's seen the handwriting on the wall, and it makes me very hopeful that we can do something big in the next month and a half. it's a good first step. um, i would say two things, though, in relation to it. when you unpack the speaker's speech, there is a premise that doesn't quite work, and we're going to have to help him move others in the republican party away from it. it's called -- part of his speech he talked about dynamic scoring. this idea that if you cut taxes, you will increase revenues. well, it's about time we debunked that myth. it's a rumpelstiltskin fairy tale, dynamic scoring. if you may remember, rumpelstiltskin was the f
driving the decisions made here. i think citing i believe speaker boehner, it's fair to say that the president also believes we don't -- he's not looking to box himself in or box other people's ideas out. as we approach the conversation that will be in on friday. >> suggest to the meeting that just took place they might have to give up more than they would like? >> i think the president has made very clear that everyone, throughout this process, not just in this past week since the election, but for some time now, that the whole point of compromise is that nobody gets to achieve their maximalist position. that was the approach we took throughout negotiations in 2011 and it's the principle the president has based his own proposals on. if you look at, again, the programs that the president has already cut through legislation he signed into law, if you look at the savings he's willing to enact as part of his plan, it demonstrates a willingness to give so that you can meet your negotiating partner somewhere in the middle and reach a deal. >> you don't have any specific -- >> i d
boehner immediately saying he generally supportive of trying to close the loop holes. do you see that as raising taxes? >> what boehner said and in the republican position since republican we should reduce rates have economic growth many of which are put in by obama for the solyndra green-type energy programs. let's bring the rates down. boehner was clear he wanted increase revenues it is not a tax increase to put more americans at work. if our recovery was growing the rate reagans did more americans would be at work. in terms of raising revenue which boehner grew about. if you grew the economy at reagan levels instead of two percent and obama and french levels, just growing faster and do that for a decade, the federal government gets trillions in taxes. we could undo the damage by having higher growth. >> gretchen: that's the difference in ideology. raise it to 3#.9 percent x. replace the alternative minimum tax with the buffet and raise the state tax and long-term capitol gains from 15-20. where do you think that those four points will go in negotiations with the republicans? >
hubbard, what boehner said, and i take from this collection some optimism in 20 # 13 the way it might play out is whether we go over or don't go over the fiscal cliff, you know, there's a lot to happen in the next three months, that we get to some space where if they did a trillion dollars of cuts and reforms to entitlements, a frl on discretionary, a trillion in new revenue, a trillion in saved interest only because the budget doesn't understand net present value, but that's okay, but if you did that, there's a grand bargain in a way that would be, i think, a pretty good accomplishment for both parties. i think that the principle thing in that is is can you gent a significant chunk of republicans in the house to support anything that has a trillion dollars of revenue in it. >> you think they reach a bargain, move quickly over the cliff. what happens to get to the bargain? >> yeah, sorry, i thought that's what you were asking. >> yeah. >> i'm pessimistic they will be able to sort out that bargain in the next two months so i'm afraid there's -- i think a serious danger, they go over the fis
. john boehner still in the house for the time being at the treasury. the president is back in the white house and harry reid is in the senate with a few more seats. why should i believe this would end any more positively than the summer of 2011? >> because again i'm not going to try to talk to you in optimism but let's look at what's changed. you have republican leadership acknowledging for the first time in this debate in public that it's agreed to increase in revenues as part of an agreement that helps restore fiscal balance. that's a very important change. you can debate on what motivated that change, and of course it's true that approach has been a popular very substantial support among the american people. you have a much greater recognition that the economy would benefit on a carefully designed balanced agreement on fiscal reform and putting it off indefinitely is not good for the country. that's important, too. and i also think again if you listen carefully to what people are saying and what many politicians are saying with many elected representatives are saying there's a lot of
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)